In Ancient times when "infidles's' guns and explosives were not available to the muslims, they uses swords to spread terror across Arabia, Europe, India etc converting people by the sword, the threat was to behead the ancesors of present day Muslims who did not convert to islam and raping the female ancestors, setting their homes on fire of the ancestores of present day muslims.
Fewer infidels (non-muslims) were killed when bombs were unknown then.
If you are a muslim today, remember very clearly that your ancestores were converted by the sword, female ancestors were raped and converted to islam. It was not a free will choice. Islam means Total Submission' (convert immediately or die.) If it does not happen today it is because ''infidel' countries such as England, Russia, China, Japan, India, Israel America etc are too strong for the Muslims, who DEPEND on Western technology.
The muslims who believed that if they died in battle would go to paradise, to recieve a wonderful the reward, which I have no need to mention as is well know to all, all over the world were too much for the people who lived a religion of totally different values.
The arrival of the Colonialists, especially the British to India, saved Hindus from those religious fanatics who came from the north, and the Indians had no way to stop religious fanatics who preferred to die in battle, to go to paradise, then to surrender. Muslim did not value their lives just the same way the suicide bombers do not value their lives. One cannot try to reason with religous fanatics, such as the 911 bombers etc.
If the Boko Haram followers hate everything that is modern such as t.v, the radio, music, dancing, movies etc they should also NOT USE planes, cars, cell phones, the internet, etc. etc. as all these are WITHOUT DOUBT the ''devilish' products of INFIDELS. They should not even use the indidel's printing press for printing religious material. Maybe they could travel on donkeys and camels.
One cannot negotiate with illogical people, and the only way to protect the country is to put these people to death, or put them in prison for life, to satisfy the bleeding hearts of liberals.
Their only contribution to Science and Technology is the car bombs.
We yet have to see Muslims protest in a way that cannot be ignored, to condemn this madness now going on, by thse people who will not stop till they convert the whole world to their way of thinking.

Boko Haram's goals are very clear and the Christian community in Nigeria is starting to think that there is a deliberate attempt by Western media outlets and analysts to mask these goals.

We know that the West depends heavily on Saudi oil and that the Saudis fund Wahhabist madrassas around the World. We also know that the West does not want to "antagonise" the Muslim population.

But the truth must be told.

The truth is that Boko Haram wants to create an Islamic State in Northern Nigeria. Boko Haram leadership has said as much in repeated broadcasts and their recent activity supports that.

Their goals are to destroy the legitimacy of the government in power, "cleanse" Northern Nigeria of Christians, reform the practice of Islam and finally establish an Islamic state. These goals may be quixotic, but they actually believe they can be attained. They see themselves as the modern incarnation of Usumanu Dan Fodio, who revived the practice of Islam in Northern Nigeria (by dealing with corrupt Hausa kings and syncretic practices).

They have the sympathy of the local population, because the largely illiterate Muslim population identifies with a messianic movement that promises to reform the practice of Islam in Northern Nigeria. The locals are also wary about the rapid expansion of Christianity.

How will Nigeria's 80 million strong Christians "adapt" to Boko Haram? That question should keep analysts worried. Christians believe that the West will not support them in event of an more serious escalation of this crisis (they point to Copts, Iraqi and Afghan Christians). They don't also want to share the same fate as the Church in North Africa (this phrase is regularly repeated in Christian circles). And finally, they have a weak central government that is unable to guarantee their safety.

Expect St. Augustine and the theory of "just war" to be preached from pulpits. "Self defence" will be emphasised.

They will fight back, and the question is not if, but when. It will be extremely messy, but mark my words, Nigerian Christians WILL NOT allow an Al Qaeda clone to run amock in Nigeria. Boko Haram will pay in blood.

It appears to me that one way of dealing with the problem is to let Boko Haram do exactly what they want; create an Islamic state in northern Nigeria. Let them wallow in their medieval theocracy. Then the Christian south can move forward with the task of building Africa's largest economy without interruption from these fools. Soon they will be begging to be re-admitted to the Nigerian state from their impoverished, landlocked patch of nothingness.

The problem is that there is no such thing as a "Christian" South or a "Muslim" North. There are states in Northern Nigeria with Christian majorities and states in Southern Nigeria with very significant Muslim minorities.

Christian and Muslim populations are incredibly mixed, a forced separation will make Yugoslavia look like a playground fight.

The problem is that there is no such thing as a "Christian" South or a "Muslim" North. There are states in Northern Nigeria with Christian majorities and states in Southern Nigeria with very significant Muslim minorities.

Christian and Muslim populations are incredibly mixed, a forced separation will make Yugoslavia look like a playground fight.

The problem is that there is no such thing as a "Christian" South or a "Muslim" North. There are states in Northern Nigeria with Christian majorities and states in Southern Nigeria with very significant Muslim minorities.

Christian and Muslim populations are incredibly mixed, a forced separation will make Yugoslavia look like a playground fight.

I hate to admit it, but that might be the best way forward, especially since the alternative looks like a horrible civil war. There are some elements to consider, though. First, it would mean at very least the displacement of all Christians living in the North. More importantly, if the government capitulates to this kind of unprovoked brutality, it might encourage other groups around the world to adopt their methods.

Even if the northern Wahhabist state eventually collapsed, extremists would not be deterred. They would not blame the failure on a sharia-based government founded on and enforced by extreme violence. It is not in the nature of utopia builders question their base utopian principles. Somehow or other, the failure must be the result of outside interference -- the result, for example, of the greedy southerners and their oil fields. Civil war may be inevitable after all.

Sorry to say it, but they're right -- the West will not support them. Americans have largely turned against involvement in foreign crises, even when a humanitarian disaster is underway, even when there is a clear aggressor. That is the sad lessons of Iraq and Afghanistan -- we learned that such actions can bleed our country of blood and treasure while we only seem to make the situation worse. It's a shame, because, as much as I understand those lessons, it still sticks in my throat that the powerful should stand aside and tut while the weak and the innocent suffer.

What is more infuriating, to me, is the other reason we won't get involved in Nigeria. And that's because no one knows about it. If I bring up Nigeria or Sudan in conversation, not even my most informed friends have any idea what's happening there. It makes me ill, sometimes, how little the American media reports on black Africa, and how little the average American seems to care.

The interventions in Iraq in Afghanistan were very different from any possible move into Nigeria. In Iraq and Afghanistan, no one on the ground in the countries in question wanted the US to come. There was a few exiles in Istanbul swearing that their homeland itched to be liberated and they were blowing smoke. In those two countries, the US did not get involved in a foreign crisis, it created it.

You can intervene successfully if there is a constituency on the ground who supports it like what happened in Libya.

Nigeria always will be a sad, murderous, corrupt mess, the Christians being almost as guilty as the Muslims in this. The one and only solution to this religious idiocy is a Pakistan-style partition, with the international community focusing on preventing the mass massacres which marred Pakistan's ugly birth, and not caring a bit about the two newborn countries' inner workings. That still means armed and proactive intervention, organizing cross-direction exoduses and resettling, rather than "protecting" them with ineffectual blue helmet roadblocks.

The appeal in your suggestion belies the complex nature of a seething volcano waiting to erupt from multiple craters. I would love to tow your line and assume the North will be content to "wallow in their medieval theocracy". But then juxtapose that line of thought with the greed for the oil buried in the depths of the southern delta and therein lies a recipe for taking over the north as it were and orchestrating a relentless bloody siege for the riches of the black gold in the south.

In Islam, the world is divided between the believers and the infidels, between Dar al Islam (“the house of Islam”) and Dar al Harb (“the house of war”). All non-Muslims are included in the "house of war", and thus, can be forced to accept Islam through Jihad, Holy War. America and most European countries are not "the house of Islam", they therefore are in "the house of war". Muslims living in foreign, non-Islam nations owes their loyalty only to Islam and not the country they live in. These Muslims are permitted to say anything, including lies, or do anything -so long as it helps Islam.
It is well known that the aim of islam is to concert the whole world to Islam, that means including the Russians, Chinese, Japanee, Englishmen, Americans, Hindus etc.etc. to Islam. Considering that they are so backward, is something one cannot reason out with people locked in something like the stone age, or 7th century thinking.
Since they hate western clothing etc one cannot help asking: "'Why the heck do they want to come to countries such as England, France, America etc." They ought to think of emigrating to Saudi Arabia, or Afghanistan, or Somalia etc. where they would be accepted with open arms.